Except for Texas A&M and Michigan State. They are a little different. Angry Napoleon complexes with those two due to Texas/Michigan being in the same state and getting more attention. Admittedly this has softened with Michigan State due to its football success this past decade.

As a former member of the sports media, this is not typically what reporters set out to do.

Are there some bad apples like in any profession ... yes. But,overall, the media is not out to get teams.

If you look at the media as a zero sum gain, then you're going to view the media as being against Michigan this week because Loyola and it's awesome 98-year-old nun is the better story so that's what's going to receive more attention.

I know their press stopped Michigan from getting into the offensive sets rigtht away, but I can't remember the press causing an actual turnover. I'm sure there was one or two I'm forgetting, but Z and MAAR were fantastic at getting the ball and bringing it up the court.

Simpson has been the MVP of this game so far. HIs ability to get the ball up the court without turning it over despite pressure every time up the court and his ability to drive and either finish or find the open guy really seems to be the only offense.

Pointing out issues or stating one is concerned about the direction of the program doesn't mean one doesn't support the program.

Michigan football, unfortunately, has not been consistently great since the 1980s/1990s. While it looked like Harbaugh was returning the program to that level, this past year was a tough one. Following it up with a meh recruiting class that includes lower-rated prospects in the areas we've had problems in the recent past (quarterback, offensive line) makes worrying about the program logical.

I don't quite understand why people think it's that difficult to understand.

Any individual player, no matter what he is rated, could turn out to be great or could possibly never see the field during a game.

That said, 5 stars (as a whole) are more likely to succeed than 4 stars, and 4 stars are more likely to succeed than three stars.

What does that mean?

It means you want to have a top-five rated recruiting class.

Yes, some three stars will be great. Yes, some five stars will be busts.

Statistically, if you have a top-five recruiting class year after year, you have better chances for more players to be great, and thus you have a better chance of making the playoffs and winning a national championship.

Year-in-and-year-out the teams that win/compete for national championships have top-rated recruiting classes.

The rankings of individual players are going to be off. The class rankings are more likely to accurately reflect the type of team you're going to field.

If you're looking for anything more scientific than that, well, good luck. Hard to predict character, injuries and other things.

I'm not sure if people forget where the program was before Harbaugh. I think it's more that people aren't living in a bubble. They see what Michigan's main rivals are doing. They view Michigan as being equal to (Ohio State) or better than (MSU) them and wonder what is wrong with the program.

Would we be as quick to be disappointed with th first three years of Harbaugh if we weren't watching Ohio State and Michigan State in the midst of the greatest periods of their respective programs? (I didn't look up if this is accurate, but it has to be close to being true).

Penn State just returned from the most heinous cover up in college football history to have back-to-back years better than any back-to-back Michigan years in recent history.

Penn State also should be proof that any program with the $$$ and the right coach can return to prominence.

I don't really have a point as to whether this is the right or wrong mentaility. I'm certainly frustrated by Michigan turning into overall into an above average to average program. And, unfortunately, it's starting (for me) to reach the point where I just assume Michigan won't return to being one of the elite programs in the country.

If I read the last two paragraphs in this my post they're completely opposite. Penn State is proof that any program can overcome anything. And I feel that Michigan never will get it turned back around.

I don't really care if they're scared or not. I don't really care if we're living in their head rent free. I don't really care how they spin everything ... or that when they beat Michigan it's orgasmic. Who cares?

We should care about beating them. That's it.

Everything else is the BS fans tell themselves to feel better.

Fluky punt. They still won.

Monsoon. They still won.

They're 2-1 against Harbaugh. Harbaugh is 1-2 against them. That's all that matters.

They're not scared. We're not scared.

But for people over here to continuing spewing that they're worried about Michigan or they're dropping back to football abyss because we pickup this recruit or that transfer ... that makes it seem like we're the ones who don't live in reality.

Was actually impressed with Lewerke. MSU moved the pocket a lot against Iowa and Lewerke seemed smart with the run and the pass. He seemed to be able to go through his progressions and was surprisingly accurrate.

Just watching the offensive snaps I would have guessed that MSU dominated Iowa. The Iowa defense looked a lot slower than Michigan's has looked.

Other observations:

1. MSU took the ball right down the field on Iowa on the first drive of the game. Seemed very similar to the way MSU moved the ball right down the field against Michigan last year on the first drive.

2. Lots of misdirection from MSU. This is where most of their running yards came from. Maybe 1-2 runs up the middle for more than a few yards.

3. Wide receiver Felton Davis had a great game against Iowa. He looks dangerous, especially in the red zone.

You're right. The whole "we were a vanilla offense against Team A and will break out the exotic flavors later on against Team B" is something every fan base says. It's rarely true. The truth is, the majority of the time, teams are who they are. If you change by a large amount every week you end up being not great at anything because you haven't practiced anything enough.

Obviously you can add in more plays and save some things from week to week, but, the majority of the time, offenses typically get better because players improve at doing what they're supposed to do or coaches work around areas where players can't do what they're supposed to do.

The reason it hasn't been raised is Dallas is pretty far from the territories that have been devastated by the hurricane.

I live in Austin and we've been pelted with rain the past two days (probably will get rain the next couple, too). But Austin is not experiencing major flooding when compared to Houston/Port Aransas and other areas (areas that are 2-4 hours East when traveling by car). Some flooding of creeks and downed trees, but nothing huge. East of Austin is bad, and the further East you get the worse it gets.

Dallas, while a little East of Austin on a map, is much further away from from the storm than Austin. That's because Dallas is much further north (basically 200+ miles straight north) I don't know how much rain the Dallas area has gotten, but I'd be shocked if it was more than 5 inches

I am hoping Michigan wins these games. I want them to win these games. But hope and want are the key words.

But these are preseason prognostications. Objectively: Why would anybody who's not a fan of the Wolverines think Michigan, the youngest team in country, would win all of those or most of those games? Because Harbaugh? Harbaugh, who hasn't beaten OSU yet (and yes I know about the refs last year, but, truthfully, 99% of the time only fans of teams who lost remember refs) ... who's 1-1 against MSU (although should be 2-0 ... I still haven't gotten over that damn punt block and not sure I ever will) ... who hasn't finished higher than third in the BIG East.

I think 2-2 (assuming Michigan wins all its other games) would be a great season for this team and lead to a lot of excitement in 2018. Anything better than that is gravy. Anything worse than that and we're all going to have to spend an entire offseason listening to the media and oposing fans talk about how Harbaugh and the Wolverines are always overhyped and overrated.

Then again, last year in the preseason nobody was picking Penn State. That prediction would have been crazy.

I was at the Missouri-Nebraska kicked ball overtime game when the Michigan-penn state game was happening, and about every 10 minutes the Michigan score would pop up and I kept thinking it was a mistake.

I think penn state was ranked no. 2 and Michigan 4 at the time.

Nebraska was 1. I know because to this day I still can't believe Missouri choked that game away.

I used to watch other schools recruit like this — Texas, USC and recently Alabama — and wonder why Michigan couldn't match their recruiting. Especially Texas, which basically is Michigan south (the two schools are very similar in how they view themselves and how others view them). And, yes, I know Texas has an advantage by having a huge home state to pull recruits from.

I just always wanted Michigan to recruit like the top schools do. Now, Hoke is doing exactly that.

They're both great. They've both done great jobs since they've taken over at Ohio State/Michigan. They've both done great jobs prior to their current jobs.

To argue over who's a better recruiter when both are consistently pulling in four/five stars is pretty stupid. To actually try and win that argument is even dumber. Especially since you really can't judge a recruiting class until the players have graduated and you're looking back at their accomplishments.

I hope this continues and Hoke and Meyer make the next 10 years the second coming of the Big 2 and Little (insert correct # here). And here's to Michigan winning the majority of those matchups.

As for Meyer's national championships ... he won them. Of course, neither of those Florida teams managed to go undefeated.